Next steps...

[discardedastro]

Hi all,

Long time reader, thought I'd post for a change!

I've been working my way up to a sensible AP rig, with a focus largely on DSOs. My current setup is:

• Skywatcher 200PDS
• Skywatcher EQ6-R Pro mount
• Primaluce 60mm guidescope and ASI120MC guidecam
• Nikon D1X (yes, the 17 year old one) camera for imaging
• Other bits: Hotech laser collimator, Bahtinov mask, Nevada 12V PSU, QHY Polemaster, Astrozap dew shield for the 200P, random PCs, and a Telegizmos cover
• Software: PHD2 guiding, capturing on the DSLR with a hardware intervalometer, Rawtherapee+DSS+ST for post

I spent probably the first year arsing about with the 120MC and not quite figuring out how to drive everything - alignment on the EQ6-R, collimation, _proper_ alignment, stacking, processing, etc. I got DSS and StarTools as a starting point, though considering grabbing PixInsight next year. I'm currently setting all this up just outside my house which is a class 4 bortle area (estimated), and leaving the scopes/mount out 24/7 - so far so good on that front! I'm planning to build a simple ROR obsy next year to save tearing it all down and setting up every night.

I got the D1X as a donation last month, and added the guidescope as a Christmas present. With this motley lot I've managed to gather the two attached - M33 was 4 or 5 hours of integration, M31 considerably less and with 98% humidity so quite dewy optics and the fog rolling in! But I seem to be managing reasonably good guiding and stability - M31 was using 2m30s light frames, M33 using 60s lights. The D1X has an ancient sensor and pretty poor sensitivity, plus it has oddly shaped pixels that make postprocessing fiddly.

The question really now forming in my head is: where next? I'm largely thinking an upgrade to the camera would be sensible given the extreme age of the sensor. It's been fab having a larger frame and more pixels than the 120MC but getting a back-side-illuminated sensor based camera seems a no-brainer as a next sensible investment, probably followed by a reasonable APO scope (the mid-to-large Williams Optics or Skywatcher Esprits are looking about right in terms of price). But am I missing some sensible small investments, quality-of-life wise? What camera should I be looking at - the ZWO 183MM looks great from a resolution perspective but the 1600MM still looks tough to beat in the sensitivity dept. Some guidance or thoughts on sensible next steps would be welcomed, basically - I've been staring at all the options for a while now!

[ebdons]

Hi good images by the way, F5 you may not need a CC, everything else looks ok but there is a competitive market for the ultimate ccd imager now and CMOS are really coming up with some good stuff QHY and others, I have the SX825m and it is pretty expensive but the service backup is second to none, a qhy10 is pretty good and some of the newer qhy cmos etc  choose wisely whether Mono or OSC maybe go for both if budget allows? Ton

[wimvb]

Welcome to the forum. You seem to have control of your situation. As you already concluded, an astrocamera should be your next investment. For dso's it should be a cooled one. Mono is a bit more expensive, but allows for easier narrowband imaging than osc. With an astrocam, you also need a computer to control it.

I would also invest in a coma corrector, if I were you.

[discardedastro]

Coma corrector's an interesting one - have been considering picking up a Baader MPCC or the Skywatcher corrector/reducer, but have only seen a very small amount of coma in my light frames (example attached). I think If I upgrade the camera I may start to notice it a bit more - the D1X may be ancient but it got me making images I was actually happy with and happy sharing (and thanks for the kind feedback!) - it is a bloody old thing though! I've attached a single light frame.

I think I'll stick to mono, whichever way I go vendor-and-sensor wise. Some of the higher resolution sensors like the 20MP one in the ASI183 seem promising on paper, and come in at a slightly lower price point than the ASI1600; I haven't quite gotten my head around the whole pixel-size-vs-sensitivity-vs-telescope-f-ratio-and-FoV relationship yet, though. The 200's not ideal for some DSOs in terms of the usual field of view but seems to sit nicely in a price-performance sweet spot for some targets (like M33), but I do want a camera that will be versatile enough down the line.

DSC_1221.tif

[wimvb]

The ASI1600 has proven itself quite well as a capable astrocamera. But cmos cameras work best with a very large number of subs, compared to traditional ccd. Make sure your computer and hard drive are up to it.

The ASI183 has small pixels, which results in oversampling with your scope (roughly 0.48 "/pixel vs 0.76 for the ASI1600). Although, you could probably use it binned 2x2, and still have a good resolution camera if/when you image at shorter focal length.

You can do a search on Astrobin for the cameras and scope combination you're interested in, and see what others have achieved. That should give you some ideas about what to expect.

[discardedastro]

Thought I'd follow up on this, at risk of necro'ing a thread - I went for the ASI183MM-PRO in the end and have been very happy with it.

The oversampling and narrow FoV make for incredible detail - I've only had two nights with it so I'm still working out the kinks, and the coma corrector is still on its way (along with a Hitecastro DC focus).

I got a set of Baader LRGB and mini EFW which appears to be working well, and stumped for Sequence Gen Pro which I got working with EQMOD and platesolving yesterday!

First quick image attached, though I've got plenty of PI/LRGB stuff to learn - thanks all for the advice!